Was Chernobyl bad for the environment
-
Apart from the human cost, was Chernobyl bad for the environment? From what I understand the ecology in and around the town is in a better state now than before the accident.
-
Apart from the human cost, was Chernobyl bad for the environment? From what I understand the ecology in and around the town is in a better state now than before the accident.
That seems likely, given the international attention on the area. The question is - what did it cost to make this the case, and how could that money have been spent elsewhere by Russia if Chernobyl had not happened ?
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
-
Apart from the human cost, was Chernobyl bad for the environment? From what I understand the ecology in and around the town is in a better state now than before the accident.
Yeah, that's why James Lovelock sarcasticly recommends storing nuclear waste in open containers in the rainforest. It would keep humans away at a negligible cost to flora and fauna.
Ryan
"Michael Moore and Mel Gibson are the same person, except for a few sit-ups. Moore thought his cheesy political blooper reel was going to tell people how to vote. Mel thought that his little gay SM movie about his imaginary friend was going to help him get to heaven." - Penn Jillette
-
Apart from the human cost, was Chernobyl bad for the environment? From what I understand the ecology in and around the town is in a better state now than before the accident.
You are joking right? There are farms in England that are still unable to sell their cattle and sheep because since the cloud from the big C passed over. Anything that grows on certain hills contains too much radioactivity to be fit for human consumption. Not to mention the continuely escalating growth of cancers in the surrounding area
pseudonym67 My Articles[^] Beginning KDevelop Programming[^]
-
You are joking right? There are farms in England that are still unable to sell their cattle and sheep because since the cloud from the big C passed over. Anything that grows on certain hills contains too much radioactivity to be fit for human consumption. Not to mention the continuely escalating growth of cancers in the surrounding area
pseudonym67 My Articles[^] Beginning KDevelop Programming[^]
That is danger to humans, who are worried about things like small increases in cancer rates in a large population. Even a several hundred percent increase in cancer rates would register pretty low down on the list of problems for wild animals. The high radcount around chernobyl keeps humans out (who are number one on the list of problems for wild animals).
Ryan
"Michael Moore and Mel Gibson are the same person, except for a few sit-ups. Moore thought his cheesy political blooper reel was going to tell people how to vote. Mel thought that his little gay SM movie about his imaginary friend was going to help him get to heaven." - Penn Jillette
-
You are joking right? There are farms in England that are still unable to sell their cattle and sheep because since the cloud from the big C passed over. Anything that grows on certain hills contains too much radioactivity to be fit for human consumption. Not to mention the continuely escalating growth of cancers in the surrounding area
pseudonym67 My Articles[^] Beginning KDevelop Programming[^]
I wasn't talking about the Human Cost, everyone knows from our point of view it was a disaster. I'm talking about the ecology. I'm not sure a rise in cancer rates is bad for the environment.
-
Apart from the human cost, was Chernobyl bad for the environment? From what I understand the ecology in and around the town is in a better state now than before the accident.
-
Apart from the human cost, was Chernobyl bad for the environment? From what I understand the ecology in and around the town is in a better state now than before the accident.
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
was Chernobyl bad for the environment?
How it could be? :laugh::laugh:;P;P
-
Giles, you do ask stupid questions. Look here and all of its sub-pages. http://www.chernobyl.info/[^]
mmm There's a lot their about how badly contaminated plants and animals are, but does this adversely affect the ecology of the area? If so, why? You'd alsa have to balance the effects with the fact theat their aren't people around any more. I wonder if the other things that people were doing was causing more dammage to the eco system.
-
I wasn't talking about the Human Cost, everyone knows from our point of view it was a disaster. I'm talking about the ecology. I'm not sure a rise in cancer rates is bad for the environment.
Human's are part of the ecology.
-
Human's are part of the ecology.
That's very true. Sometimes an ecology gets out of balance. Look at Japanese knotweed, fine in japan but a nightmare somewhere else. Maybe radiation is a magic dust. If you sprinkle it over an area it keeps the humans out and, hey presto everything benefits. Except us of course.
-
Apart from the human cost, was Chernobyl bad for the environment? From what I understand the ecology in and around the town is in a better state now than before the accident.
Well, almost everyone moved away, the area is deindustrialized now, and fish and mushroom are really big.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify! || Fold With Us! || sighist -
mmm There's a lot their about how badly contaminated plants and animals are, but does this adversely affect the ecology of the area? If so, why? You'd alsa have to balance the effects with the fact theat their aren't people around any more. I wonder if the other things that people were doing was causing more dammage to the eco system.
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
does this adversely affect the ecology of the area?
Taken from Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, ecol-o-gy \ i-'klj\ n. pl. -gies [G kologie, fr. k-ec- + -logie -logy] (1858) 1. A branch of science concerned with the interrelationship of organisms and their environments. 2. The totality or pattern of relations between organisms and their environment. 3. HUMAN ECOLOGY. And from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecology[^] "Ecology, or ecological science, is the scientific study of the distribution and abundance of living organisms and how the distribution and abundance are affected by interactions between the organisms and their environment" I wouldn't want my worst enemy (not that I have any) to suffer as the animal and vegetation life forms have, and I'm not jusy limiting that observation to mere mortal human beings. Not just talking about today, also talking about the future. With mutations in DNA caused by massive radiation to all life forms. You tell me Giles if this is the kind of "hell" that you want your children and your children's children to inherit? During the Soviet era, there was great industrial pollution but to ask if that was better or worse than Chenobyl, frankly, I don't know, but their effects will be measured in hundreds of years.
-
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
does this adversely affect the ecology of the area?
Taken from Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, ecol-o-gy \ i-'klj\ n. pl. -gies [G kologie, fr. k-ec- + -logie -logy] (1858) 1. A branch of science concerned with the interrelationship of organisms and their environments. 2. The totality or pattern of relations between organisms and their environment. 3. HUMAN ECOLOGY. And from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecology[^] "Ecology, or ecological science, is the scientific study of the distribution and abundance of living organisms and how the distribution and abundance are affected by interactions between the organisms and their environment" I wouldn't want my worst enemy (not that I have any) to suffer as the animal and vegetation life forms have, and I'm not jusy limiting that observation to mere mortal human beings. Not just talking about today, also talking about the future. With mutations in DNA caused by massive radiation to all life forms. You tell me Giles if this is the kind of "hell" that you want your children and your children's children to inherit? During the Soviet era, there was great industrial pollution but to ask if that was better or worse than Chenobyl, frankly, I don't know, but their effects will be measured in hundreds of years.
No need to get overly emotional Richard. I just posted a question as I thought it might be interesting to discuss something other than Muslims for a change. Why are mutations in DNA bad for all life forms? What sort of hell do you want for your children and grand children? "The totality or pattern of relations between organisms and their environment." - That's what I was getting at - the totality, not just looking at it from the human perspective. Maybe considering the eco system as a whole, the accident could be viewed as a good thing. I completely accept that from our perspective it's a disaster.
-
No need to get overly emotional Richard. I just posted a question as I thought it might be interesting to discuss something other than Muslims for a change. Why are mutations in DNA bad for all life forms? What sort of hell do you want for your children and grand children? "The totality or pattern of relations between organisms and their environment." - That's what I was getting at - the totality, not just looking at it from the human perspective. Maybe considering the eco system as a whole, the accident could be viewed as a good thing. I completely accept that from our perspective it's a disaster.
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
No need to get overly emotional Richard
No emotions, just the need to put the record straight.
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
discuss something other than Muslims for a change
This subject has been done to death but Espeir will always find something new to talk about Muslims
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
Why are mutations in DNA bad for all life forms
for instance read this abstract http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2164/7/237/abstract[^] then read some more from (1) http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcgenomics[^] (2) http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2164/7/239/abstract[^] and a thousand other scientific research arcticles available from http://www.biomedcentral.com/[^]
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
What sort of hell do you want for your children and grand children
No Hell, just a better quality of life in all its respects than that which was experienced by myself
-
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
No need to get overly emotional Richard
No emotions, just the need to put the record straight.
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
discuss something other than Muslims for a change
This subject has been done to death but Espeir will always find something new to talk about Muslims
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
Why are mutations in DNA bad for all life forms
for instance read this abstract http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2164/7/237/abstract[^] then read some more from (1) http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcgenomics[^] (2) http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2164/7/239/abstract[^] and a thousand other scientific research arcticles available from http://www.biomedcentral.com/[^]
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
What sort of hell do you want for your children and grand children
No Hell, just a better quality of life in all its respects than that which was experienced by myself
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
This subject has been done to death but Espeir will always find something new to talk about Muslims
What about leftists?
"You act like jew." -Score: 1.0 (3 votes).
-
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
No need to get overly emotional Richard
No emotions, just the need to put the record straight.
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
discuss something other than Muslims for a change
This subject has been done to death but Espeir will always find something new to talk about Muslims
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
Why are mutations in DNA bad for all life forms
for instance read this abstract http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2164/7/237/abstract[^] then read some more from (1) http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcgenomics[^] (2) http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2164/7/239/abstract[^] and a thousand other scientific research arcticles available from http://www.biomedcentral.com/[^]
Ægidius Ahenobarbus wrote:
What sort of hell do you want for your children and grand children
No Hell, just a better quality of life in all its respects than that which was experienced by myself
can't you speak for yourself rather than posting links to scientific journals? Is their evidence of massive DNA mutations in the wildlife around chernobyl?
-
can't you speak for yourself rather than posting links to scientific journals? Is their evidence of massive DNA mutations in the wildlife around chernobyl?
-
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
This subject has been done to death but Espeir will always find something new to talk about Muslims
What about leftists?
"You act like jew." -Score: 1.0 (3 votes).
-
Don't you like reading scientific journals. They can be fascinating. And if you want facts rather than gossip and assumptions and inuendo's, then use such freely available academic research. If you want the latter, then read "The Sun" newspaper.
I like reading scientific journals, I don't read the Sun, I also like discussing things with people who have their own ideas and don't just tell me to go away and read a journal.